From: Sibi Sankar <email@example.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,
email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add cpu OPP tables
Date: Wed, 05 May 2021 15:39:17 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
On 2021-05-05 14:19, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Sibi,
> On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:55:10PM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
>> Hey Sudeep,
>> Thanks for the review!
>> On 2021-05-04 20:12, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> > NACK, this breaks if there is a mismatch from what is read from the
>> > hardware and what is presented in this table above. Either add it from the
>> > some bootloader or other boot code to this table reading from the
>> > hardware/firmware or find a way to link them without this.
>> > Sorry I had warned long back about this when such links were discussed
>> > as part of interconnect binding.
>> Not sure why this warrants a NACK, as this was consensus for mapping
>> freq to DDR/L3 bandwidth votes. (We use the same solution on SDM845
>> SC7180). The opp tables are optional and when specified puts in votes
>> DDR/L3. In the future the table can be safely dropped when more useful
>> devfreq governors are upstreamed.
>> cpufreq: qcom: Don't add frequencies without an OPP
> (You can always add commit sha to make it easy to search)
> But I am not sure how this is related to the above commit anyways.
>> I guess your main concern for breakage is ^^ commit? The original
>> design is
>> to list a super set of frequencies supported by all variants of the
>> along with the required DDR/L3 bandwidth values. When we run into
>> non-documented frequency we just wouldn't put in bw votes for it which
>> should be fine since the entire opp_table is optional. If this is the
>> for the NACK I can try get it reverted with Matthias's ack.
> No my main concern is this platform uses "qcom-cpufreq-hw" driver and
> fact that the OPPs are retrieved from the hardware lookup table
> whatever we have in DT. In short it will be junk and becomes obsolete.
The table provides mapping to bandwidths
which aren't available in the firmware
though. In short we do have to store the
mapping somewhere i.e. a mapping that
lists all possible frequencies to its
bandwidth requirements needs to be present
and using a opp table with the interconnect
bw bindings was the consensus reached.
Given that a duplicate mapping that lists
all possible frequencies to bw is inevitable
and Qualcomm has a way of listing all the
supported frequencies for the SoC, I feel
that dt breakage in the future should be
a non-concern. Not sure why you call it
junk since it solves the perf/power
requirements on SDM845/SC7180 SoCs. When
it becomes obsolete it would mean that
they are better devfreq governors available
upstream and that's a good reason for the
opp tables to go away.
> So what I suggested before is still valid. You simply can't have static
> OPP tables in the DT for this platform. Do get some boot code to fetch
> same from the h/w LUT and patch to the DT or figure out any other way
> manage dynamically.
moving the logic to boot loader doesn't
magically fix your concerns though (since
it would also need a superset of available
frequencies). It will suffer from the same
problems with an additional dependency on
firmware propagation in case of breakages
which is something you can avoid for the
simple cpu based scaling solution.
> So NACK still stands for static addition of OPPs to the DT as in this
I'll let Viresh take the call since this
solution is already used on older SoCs.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-05 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-30 14:28 [PATCH 0/2] DDR/L3 Scaling support on SC7280 SoCs Sibi Sankar
2021-04-30 14:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: blacklist SC7280 in cpufreq-dt-platdev Sibi Sankar
2021-05-03 16:20 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2021-04-30 14:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add cpu OPP tables Sibi Sankar
2021-05-03 16:36 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2021-05-04 7:05 ` Sibi Sankar
2021-05-04 14:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-05-04 18:25 ` Sibi Sankar
2021-05-04 19:16 ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2021-05-05 8:49 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-05-05 10:09 ` Sibi Sankar [this message]
2021-05-05 11:41 ` Sudeep Holla
2021-05-05 11:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-05-05 11:44 ` Sudeep Holla
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).